6 FAITH forum B


Restructuring proposal is bad medicine for UMC


BY TIM MCCLENDON Special Contributor


There has been much fanfare


about the restructuring plan for the United Methodist Church that will be presented to the 2012 General Confer- ence. I just had a conversation with someone who recently came back from a meeting with a general agency of the church where the plan was explained. We had a wonderful conversation about the history of the UMC and our polity as it relates to the proposed legislation. I have to admit


Tim McClendon


that I am personally involved in this process as both a member of the Connectional Table that approved the proposed new structure and as a member of the leg- islative writing team that has com- posed it. Although I disagree with key sections I have been faithful in my re- sponsibility to write good legislation with the hope that holy conferencing and the wisdom of General Confer- ence 2012 will correct the trouble- some parts. A primary concern for me is that


we are allowing a business model to dictate ecclesiology. I know we’re in terrible economic times but that doesn’t give us license to overturn our polity for the sake of saving money. Actually, I think the money-saving is a smoke screen to hand more power over to the Council of Bishops. Our polity is based on the separa-


tion of powers. Our two constitutional powers in the UMC are episcopacy and conferences. Theymust be held in perpetual tension and balance. Judi- cial Council decisions as well as the 2008 Book of Discipline are clear in this matter. For instance, Decisions 689 and 1156 are important citations. There are more! The Constitution clearly states that


“The Annual Conference is the basic body in the Church and shall have re- served to it the right to vote . . . on all matters relating to the character and conference relations of its ministerial members.” (Par. 36) The separation of authority and decision making is inte- gral to the United Methodist Constitu- tion and law. While the boundaries can become hazy in any particular situa- tion, the preservation of the separation of powers must be observed. (Judicial Decision 689, rendered in 1993) The separation of authority and de-


cision making is integral to the United Methodist Constitution and law. (Judi- cial Decison 1156, rendered in 2010) In addition, Par. 140 of the 2008


Book of Discipline states, “Under the constitution and disciplinary proce- dures set forth in this Book of Disci- pline, ‘The United Methodist Church’ as a denominational whole is not an entity, nor does it possess legal capaci- ties and attributes. It does not and cannot hold title to property, nor does it have any officer, agent, employee, of- fice or location.” Par. 2509 of the same Discipline says that we are a non-jural entity, that we cannot be sued as a de- nominational whole because we do not exist as a denomination! Rather, our polity has affirmed since our very existence that we are a movement, a group of separately incorporated mis- sion outposts for the Kingdom of God!


Concentrating power Unfortunately, the Interim Opera-


tions Team/Connectional Table pro- posals for restructuring will set up a 15-member Center for Connectional Mission and Ministry and have a set- aside bishop as one of its members and perhaps its chair. This certainly overturns Par. 140 of the Discipline by


‘It changes us from a spiritual movement into a more bureaucratic quagmire than we already are.’


creating both an office/location and an officer! Another frightening thought is that this Center’s only oversight will come from a 45-mem- ber group (the General Council for Oversight and Strategy) that will meet just once a year. Its chair will be the same set-aside bishop who will either lead or be a member of the Center. For legal and fiduciary protection


this is a wrong-headed idea. Legal counsel has already observed that having a denominational center and officer leaves the denomination open for wholesale litigation possibilities. This is a streamlined business model to be sure and saves a ton of money by reducing the costs of separate boards


NOVEMBER 11, 2011 | UNITED MET HODI S T REPORTER


and agencies having to send 565 peo- ple to meetings; but the cost to our historic polity, balance of powers, and core value of diversity will be greater than any savings. A 15-member center can hardly be


inclusive of all the voices of the UMC. If the purpose of the legislation is to make the denomination more nimble and connect it more closely with an- nual conferences and local churches, then this widens the chasm in my opinion. Voices will not be at the table and will not be heard! Having a quasi-pope from the


Council of Bishops may make busi- ness sense, but it violates our historic separation of powers. We are a spiri- tual movement that needs bishops who will be leaders, but not with one set-aside bishop. We need all the bish- ops to be set-aside in their annual conferences!


Personal connections We all know how little time bish-


ops actually spend in their annual conferences. Where are the teaching days? Where is the personal contact and interaction across annual confer- ences and in local churches? If we want local churches to be mission out- posts then bishops must see their pri- mary duty as being in their episcopal areas. How about a promise not to spend


more than 21 days outside the annual conference? How about a promise to spend teaching days with laity and clergy in every district at least twice a year? How about a promise to spend time in each district staying in homes, getting to know people and schedul- ing time with every clergyperson in each district? All these things and more come to


my mind as a way for United Method- ism to regain some of its relevance. It will be possible through personal con- nections! Personal connections make United Methodist connectionalism work. The proposal coming to General


Conference 2012 is out of touch with 21st-century flat-world think- ing, and bishops and leadership have to be in touch to be relevant. There are cost-savings with the proposal but more centralization into smaller, less diverse entities does not offer the hope for change that I’m looking for. It changes us from a spiritual movement into a more bureaucratic quagmire than we already are.


The Rev. McClendon is Columbia District superintendent of the South Carolina Conference.


Upper Room events held for ubuntu, not business


BY SARAH WILKE Special Contributor


When Giunio Censi arrived at The


Upper Room’s “family reunion” in Greece last month, he was brimming with questions for me. A wiry Italian with an earnest


smile, Giunio is among our legion of volunteers around the world who sus- tain our ministries. He’d been invited to this five-day get-together, one of three global gatherings this year, to meet with his European counterparts. Giunio oversees the Italian edition


of the daily devotional guide, and I could see his laser focus was on ad- dressing his everyday details—re- cruiting writers, improving service, upgrading production technology. But I told him that wasn’t why he was among the 30-some people from 17 countries at this first “reunion.” “We’re here to get to know each


other, to explore new opportunities for ministry,” I told him. He looked confused, and I asked


for patience. I felt sure he would soon capture the event’s mood. Over the next couple days, the Holy


Spirit began to bind together this di- verse group of strangers as we wor- shipped, prayed and shared our stories. We talked about the challenges of serving the millions of refugees now pouring into Europe, about de- mands for digital material, about ways to expand our reach in this predomi- nantly secular continent. Giunio told the group about his


joys and concerns, and he talked about the evolution of The Upper Room in Italy. But later, he came to me again, still perplexed and awaiting when his nuts-and-bolts con- cerns would be ad- dressed. “Give me your


questions,” I told him, “and I’ll get them answered by our folks back at our Nashville headquarters. But right now, that’s not why we’re here.” Again, I asked for patience. As the meeting progressed, the


Sarah Wilke


creativity flowed. The editor of our Greek edition caught the vision of our Walk to Emmaus ministry and took first steps to import it. Our editor in Hungary made arrangements to ex- port copies to Romania, where thou- sands of Hungarian Christians are without resources in their language. We identified a need for a Farsi edi-


tion for the flood of Afghan refugees who are desperate for a word of hope. Finally, in our waning hours to-


gether, after we shared communion and experienced our own modern- day Pentecost—the Lord’s Prayer re- cited simultaneously in 17 languages—for the last time, Giunio approached me with a joyful smile, re- newed and energized. “I think I understand why we are


here,” he said. “It was to be a family.” I returned his smile. Finally, he


grasped how much more he is—how much more The Upper Roomis—than the programmatic details.


‘The Holy Spirit began to bind together this diverse group of strangers.’


My own understanding of what


Giunio felt also deepened in Greece, as well as in Brazil and South Africa, the regional sites of our other two re- unions.


The participants in South Africa


had a name for this spirit: ubuntu, a Bantu word that means “I am because we are.” To me, it speaks to the well- spring of individual energy, creativity and identity each of us can draw from our connection to a greater commu- nity.


At all three gatherings, I watched


spirits soar as participants saw with their own eyes that they are part of the worldwide Upper Roomfamily—not only the thousands who stoke this ministry, but also the millions who are nourished by it. I am renewed and energized, as


well, knowing that the sum of our parts—the daily devotional, Walk to Emmaus, Chrysalis, the Living Prayer Center, the Academy for Spiritual For- mation—is a powerful and global prayer movement. Those who lead it, like Giunio, are


tirelessly committed to inspiring peo- ple to action through encounters with God and relationships with one an- other. They are the proof that, when the mission is to share Christ’s bound- less love, no barrier of language, cul- ture or country can stop it.


Ms. Wilke is publisher of The Upper Room and associate general secretary of the General Board of Discipleship in Nashville, Tenn.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16